{"id":7760,"date":"2025-02-28T23:40:18","date_gmt":"2025-02-28T23:40:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.brightmine.com\/us\/?post_type=resources&p=7760"},"modified":"2026-02-04T11:05:01","modified_gmt":"2026-02-04T16:05:01","slug":"court-temporarily-blocks-portions-of-trumps-dei-executive-orders","status":"publish","type":"resources","link":"https:\/\/www.brightmine.com\/us\/resources\/hr-strategy\/inclusion-belonging\/court-temporarily-blocks-portions-of-trumps-dei-executive-orders\/","title":{"rendered":"Court temporarily blocks portions of Trump’s DEI executive orders"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

by Emily Scace<\/strong>, JD<\/strong>, Senior Legal Editor at Brightmine<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

A federal district court judge has issued a preliminary nationwide injunction blocking three provisions of two executive orders (EOs)<\/a> that target employers’ diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The injunction addresses EO 14151<\/a>, Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing<\/em>, and EO 14173<\/a>, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity<\/em>. Both EOs seek to terminate and penalize workplace DEI programming and initiatives that the Trump administration<\/a> considers to be illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the administration has not defined what constitutes “illegal DEI” or provided an explanation of the specific types of programs and practices it intends to target, leaving many employers uncertain of how to proceed<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a 63-page opinion<\/a>, U.S. District Judge Adam B. Abelson concluded that the parties challenging the EOs were likely to succeed on the merits of their case because the EOs are unconstitutionally vague, violate free speech protections under the First Amendment, and are likely to lead to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Trump administration has “made clear\u2026that viewpoints and speech considered to be in favor of or supportive of DEI or DEIA are viewpoints the government wishes to punish and, apparently, attempt to extinguish,” the opinion states. “As the Supreme Court has made clear time and time again, the government cannot rely on the threat of invoking legal sanctions and other means of coercion to suppress disfavored speech.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The injunction prohibits the federal government from:<\/p>\n\n\n\n